Partnered health research in Canada: a cross-sectional survey of perceptions among researchers and knowledge users involved in funded projects between 2011 and 2019.

IF 3.6 2区 医学 Q1 HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES Health Research Policy and Systems Pub Date : 2025-03-03 DOI:10.1186/s12961-025-01299-8
Kathryn M Sibley, Leah K Crockett, Heather L Gainforth, Ian D Graham, Femke Hoekstra, Jeff S Healey, Masood Khan, Sara Kreindler, Kent C Loftsgard, Christopher B McBride, Kelly J Mrklas, Alexie J Touchette
{"title":"Partnered health research in Canada: a cross-sectional survey of perceptions among researchers and knowledge users involved in funded projects between 2011 and 2019.","authors":"Kathryn M Sibley, Leah K Crockett, Heather L Gainforth, Ian D Graham, Femke Hoekstra, Jeff S Healey, Masood Khan, Sara Kreindler, Kent C Loftsgard, Christopher B McBride, Kelly J Mrklas, Alexie J Touchette","doi":"10.1186/s12961-025-01299-8","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Engaging knowledge users in health research is accelerating in Canada. Our objective was to examine perceptions of partnered health research among individuals involved in funded Canadian partnered health research projects between 2011 and 2019.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We invited 2155 recipients of 1153 funded projects to answer a questionnaire probing project characteristics and perceptions of partnered health research. We described and compared perceived effects of involving knowledge users in the project, team cohesion, capability, opportunity and motivation for working in partnership between two categories of respondents: project role [nominated principal investigators (NPIs), other researchers and knowledge users] and gender.</p><p><strong>Findings: </strong>We analysed data from 589 respondents (42% NPIs, 40% other researchers and 18% knowledge users; 56% women). Among the perceived effects variables, the proportion of ratings of significant influence of involving knowledge users in the project ranged between 12% and 63%. Cohesion, capability, opportunity and motivation variables ranged between 58% and 97% agreement. There were no significant differences between respondent groups for most variables. NPIs and women rated the overall influence of involving knowledge users as significant more than other respondent groups (p < 0.001). NPIs also reported higher agreement with feeling sufficiently included in team activities, pressure to engage and partnerships enabling personal goals (all p < 0.001).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Most respondents held positive perceptions of working in partnership, although ratings of perceived effects indicated limited effects of involving knowledge users in specific research components and on project outcomes. Continued analysis of project outcomes may identify specific contexts and partnership characteristics associated with greater impact.</p>","PeriodicalId":12870,"journal":{"name":"Health Research Policy and Systems","volume":"23 1","pages":"28"},"PeriodicalIF":3.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11874841/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health Research Policy and Systems","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12961-025-01299-8","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Engaging knowledge users in health research is accelerating in Canada. Our objective was to examine perceptions of partnered health research among individuals involved in funded Canadian partnered health research projects between 2011 and 2019.

Methods: We invited 2155 recipients of 1153 funded projects to answer a questionnaire probing project characteristics and perceptions of partnered health research. We described and compared perceived effects of involving knowledge users in the project, team cohesion, capability, opportunity and motivation for working in partnership between two categories of respondents: project role [nominated principal investigators (NPIs), other researchers and knowledge users] and gender.

Findings: We analysed data from 589 respondents (42% NPIs, 40% other researchers and 18% knowledge users; 56% women). Among the perceived effects variables, the proportion of ratings of significant influence of involving knowledge users in the project ranged between 12% and 63%. Cohesion, capability, opportunity and motivation variables ranged between 58% and 97% agreement. There were no significant differences between respondent groups for most variables. NPIs and women rated the overall influence of involving knowledge users as significant more than other respondent groups (p < 0.001). NPIs also reported higher agreement with feeling sufficiently included in team activities, pressure to engage and partnerships enabling personal goals (all p < 0.001).

Conclusions: Most respondents held positive perceptions of working in partnership, although ratings of perceived effects indicated limited effects of involving knowledge users in specific research components and on project outcomes. Continued analysis of project outcomes may identify specific contexts and partnership characteristics associated with greater impact.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Health Research Policy and Systems
Health Research Policy and Systems HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES-
CiteScore
7.50
自引率
7.50%
发文量
124
审稿时长
27 weeks
期刊介绍: Health Research Policy and Systems is an Open Access, peer-reviewed, online journal that aims to provide a platform for the global research community to share their views, findings, insights and successes. Health Research Policy and Systems considers manuscripts that investigate the role of evidence-based health policy and health research systems in ensuring the efficient utilization and application of knowledge to improve health and health equity, especially in developing countries. Research is the foundation for improvements in public health. The problem is that people involved in different areas of research, together with managers and administrators in charge of research entities, do not communicate sufficiently with each other.
期刊最新文献
Monitoring and adaptation of a system dynamics approach to prevent childhood overweight and obesity: findings from the LIKE programme. Attitudes and perceptions regarding knowledge translation and community engagement in medical research: the PERSPECT qualitative study. Partnered health research in Canada: a cross-sectional survey of perceptions among researchers and knowledge users involved in funded projects between 2011 and 2019. The EU project Real4Reg: unlocking real-world data with AI. Optimizing patient autonomy: a discrete choice experiment on preferences and disparities in healthcare provider selection.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1